Part 3

There existed also a town, in which carpenter’s work was the chief occupation of the inhabitants. This is to be inferred from the coat of arms belonging to the town of Tlaximaloyan, cut 12, Cod. Mendoza, pl. 10, fig. 5.

_Tlaxima_ signifies to work as a carpenter, and _tlaximalli_ a chip of wood. The “_little_” axe of copper, found by Dupaix at Quilapa, and of which he gives an illustration not differing from the known shapes of all axes, is very probably a specimen of this carpenter’s axe (see Dupaix, Vol. II., 3d Expedition, Planche II., fig. 4).

It is but natural to think that being in possession of the large chopping axe, the invention of the small hatchet would have become incomparably easier than that of this awkward carpenter’s tool. We are, however, too little informed to judge or to criticize its construction and rather incline to think that these people had reasons of their own for giving it the form it has. It must have been the one which Sahagun called “destral,” or carpenter’s hatchet.[23]

We can still offer another form of copper tool once used by the natives. Dupaix[24] discovered the original near the same town where he had found the chisel. Below is a copy of his drawing in cut 13:

The edge of this tool will be noticed to have a curve belonging to the circumference of a circle. The cutting blade is 10 inches wide. Like the axes, it has a tenon by which it could be fastened to an opening in a wooden handle. It will appear from closer description that it was too thin to have been used for heavy operations. Let us consult the narration of the explorer: “This instrument is of red and very pure copper, and when touched it gives out a sonorous sound. The metal is _not hammered_ but _cast_. It is of not much weight, symmetrical, and of graceful shape. The contours are regular and resemble those of an anchor. It is flat on both sides, the portion serving as a handle (or tenon) is a little thicker and slopes towards the edge, which cuts as well as a chisel. An Indian, named Pascual Baltolano, from the village of Zocho Xocotlan, half a mile distant from this city of Antequera, a few months ago, when tilling his field met with an earthen pot which contained 23 dozen of these blades, their quality, thickness and size being a little different from each other. This gives rise to the supposition that there existed various moulds, by means of which these specimens were multiplied and cast. They did not differ greatly from that which I possess. We meet here with a great difficulty, which is to determine to what usage these instruments were destined,—to agriculture or mechanics, as instruments of sacrifice or a variety of offensive weapon that was fixed in the point of a lance? That which is certain, however, is that they are found in abundance in this province and that merchants buy these metals from the Indians and rank them high on account of the superior quality of the ore.” On proceeding in his expedition, the same author reaches the village of Mitla, where in the parochial church he receives the following disclosure on the purpose of the before-mentioned tools: “One day, when hearing mass in Mitla, I noticed an ancient picture, which represented (San.) Isidro, the patron of the laborers, and saw him painted holding in his right hand a pole armed with the problematic blade. I therefrom conclude, that like the ancient Indians, the native laborers of to-day have adopted this instrument as a distinctive mark of their profession, and that instead of being an instrument of death it must be viewed as one for giving life.” This explanation agrees satisfactorily with what could be inferred from its size and its peculiar shape, and if we imagine the tenon bent and in this form fastened to the top of a pole we should possibly have discovered a certain garden instrument of which the Spaniards spoke as always used by the natives, the _uictli_, or coa, hoe. It was never described in particular, nor could we discover it in the pictures, but Molina’s translation of _uictli_ with “_coa_” which is hoe, tells the story.

There is still something more in this passage of Dupaix, that is worth considering. Among the 23 dozen of the instruments contained in the earthen pot, and of which he was informed that they were similar in shape to that which he had found, it is clear that there must have been a great number of very diminutive size; otherwise we cannot conceive how so many of them would have been placed in the pot, at all. Let us take advantage of this suggestion and suppose Dupaix’s engraving, cut 13, reduced to a diminutive size. We make thereby a little figure, and we cannot deny that it looks like a Greek _Tau_. Of such a _Greek Tau_, formed from copper, and used by the natives as money at the time of the Conquest mention is made by the chroniclers.[25] They may be right, but with the understanding that these copper pieces were not manufactured for the purpose of serving as coin, but as tools, which of course, came into market and became objects of barter, as we read the copper bells also did, besides grains of the cacao fruit, bales of cotton, axes and other articles of common necessity.

Thus much, and no more, we were able to glean from the early literature of the Conquest and from the paintings of the natives. As we anticipated at the outset, the testimony bearing on copper industry among the early Mexicans is altogether incomplete and lacks that fulness of description in which those writers indulge when treating topics of social customs, religious rites, or monstrous idols. In but few instances the pictures gathered from the codices illustrate the dim suggestions and the doubtful wording of the Spanish text, so as to give at least a general idea of the localities where the copper ores were obtained, of the process of smelting, of the moulds that were used, and the objects or tools that were produced by these means.

One point however we think we have come very near deciding, and one which when collecting our notes was constantly in mind, namely: Whether the Mexican bronze was to be viewed as an artificial or a natural product? There was a great doubt concerning this question caused by the first notices respecting the composition of the bronze. The expressions of Cortes and Bernal Diaz were of so condensed a character that we were at a loss how to reduce them to their elementary meaning, and the doubt was not removed when examining apart each of the subsequent writers on the same subject. But when putting their statements together, a certain basis, at least, could be obtained, from which to deduce a settled opinion. From the combined statements we learned that the bronze found among the natives contained a rich basis of copper, which was mixed either with gold, or with silver, or with tin, and we might infer from this variety of admixtures, that the natives manufactured their _laton_ according to a fixed method. But, on the contrary, as the three metals named are always found to be the steady components of Mexican copper ore, we are led to the presumption, that these ores were worked in their unaltered condition, just as nature had produced them. It is not indeed meant to teach thereby, that the native did not appreciate the fact, that copper of a deep red was softer than that of a lighter color. Whenever they had to manufacture a chisel and had a choice between the two qualities, we are certain they would have employed the lighter metal for this purpose. But we hardly believe that they considered the light metal to be a composition of the red colored copper with either silver, gold or tin. This belief would involve a presupposition of metallurgical science in the early Mexicans, that we have not the least knowledge they had ever attained to. On the other hand, however, there is a strong reason for the belief, that they recognized this light metal to be related to the red copper. For if they had thought this bronze or _laton_ to be a separate kind of metal, they would have had a separate name for it, as they had for all the other metals, from the gold down to the tin, and even to the cinnabar. Bronze would have been called _tepuzque_ as was copper, but probably—with the addition descriptive either of color or of hardness.

We were unable to discover one single hint, from which to infer that they possessed the knowledge of hardening copper by dipping the hot metal into water. This is a hypothesis, often noted and spoken of, but which ranges under the efforts made for explaining what we have no positive means to verify or to ascertain.

Though we have gained so little from our researches, this little, however, we hope may incite others to extend their investigations, and thus render the path clearer which we have tried to explore into this field of prehistoric industry. The most substantial proofs and contributions may be expected from our fellow-students in Mexico. They dwell upon the ground which was the scene of this ancient industry. They are also in a continuous contact with a numerous indigenous race, which despite of European attempts to improve their working facilities, still tenaciously cling to their old usages and fashions. Our Museums are overcrowded with Mexican idols, pottery, and flint arrow-heads. One specimen of an ancient tin-borer, one of a copper axe or hoe, or of a bronze chisel would be counted as a very welcome and valuable acquisition.

Footnote 1:

_A. v. Humboldt_, Essai s. 1. Nouv. Espagne, Tome III., Livre 4, Chap. ii. _W. H. Prescott_, History of the Conquest of Mexico, Book I., Chap. 5. _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, Hist. d. Nat. Civ. du Mexique, Livre III., Chap. 7, pag. 678.

Footnote 2:

_Carta (2da) de relacion_, por _Fernando Cortes_, de la villa Segura de Frontera desta Nueva España, á 30 de Octubre de 1520 años “donde hay todos los generos de mercaderias, que en todas las tierras se hallan, asi de mantenimientos como de vituallas, joyas de oro y de plata, de plomo, de _laton_, de _cobre_, de _estano_, de piedras, de huesos, etc.”

Footnote 3:

_Bernal Diaz de Castillo_, Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nuevo España, Madrid, 1632, I. Vol., Cap. 92, “y vendian hachas de laton, y cobre y estaño.” The meaning of this passage is, beyond all misinterpretation: He saw for sale bronze axes, and besides pieces of copper and others of tin. The order, in which these three words stand, conveys a suggestion that we should not wholly ignore. The word _laton_ (bronze) is followed by _cobre_ (copper) and _estano_ (tin), the two well known components of bronze. Might not the relative position of the three words teach that, to them, bronze was the most important metal and was therefore assigned the first place, mentioning the copper and tin afterwards as the elements from which the bronze was made? We might also go farther and inquire how the first metal came to be recognized by them as bronze. In framing a reply, let us consider three possible explanations. Let us suppose, first, that they knew the bronze well enough to recognize it at once. They, further, may have entertained doubts as to its identity, but finally have been led to this conclusion by seeing the copper and tin exhibited in the stalls, together with the bronze. Thirdly, we may also suppose, that they would desire to obtain more positive confirmation and therefore have inquired and learned from their native guides that this bronze was actually a composition of the two other metals before them. Therefore, considering all these cases, when engaged in composing their narration, the Spaniards would have remembered the circumstances connected with the memorable visit to the market, and have enumerated the metals in the order in which they actually are found; first, the bronze, the main object of their curiosity, and then the copper and tin as the key to the puzzle.

We, however, make no defence of this forced and artificial interpretation of the language, and still less would in this manner build a premise from which to deduce the final conclusion, that the natives make bronze from copper and tin. On the contrary, the facts elicited from our material, as will be seen later, conduct us to very different conclusions. Still, having been struck by the occurrence of the three words and their relative positions, we could not dismiss them altogether, especially as Cortes and Bernal Diaz were eye-witnesses and were, therefore, of highest authority. Besides, it is by no means impossible that in the future, instruments of bronze may actually be discovered and found to be composed of tin and copper. In such an event our judgment would favor the opinion that Cortes and his followers were keener observers and investigators than those who during three and one-half centuries have attempted to ventilate the question.

For the same position of words, compare also _Gomara_ (_Francisco Lopez de_), Historia General de las Indias, Ed. Barcia, Cap. 79: “There is also much featherwork in the market, and gold, silver, copper, lead, bronze (_laton_) and tin, though these three latter metals are scarce.” Gomara, it will be noticed, changed somewhat the position of the words, as compilers often do. He was a secretary to Cortes, and his work appeared in Zaragoza, 1552–1553, five years after Cortes’ death.

Footnote 4:

_Bernal Diaz_, Chap. 147.

Footnote 5:

A Vocabulario en la lengua Castellana y Mexicana, por el Rev^n Padre Fray _Alonso de Molina_: Guardian del Convento de San Antonio de Tezcuco, de la Orden de los Frayles Menores. México, 1572. This edition was preceded by a smaller one, 1552, which was the _fourteenth book_ in the series of those which were printed in Mexico.

Footnote 6:

Let us quote from Bernal Diaz, Chapter 157, without any comment, the following anecdote concerning the word _tepuzque_. “In the smelting of gold there was also allowed an eighth of alloy to every ounce to assist the men in the purchase of the necessaries of life. But we (the soldiers) derived no advantage from this, but on the contrary, it proved very prejudicial to us, for the merchants added the same percentage to the price of their goods and sold for five pesos what was only worth three, and so this alloy became, as the Indians term it, tepuzque or copper. This expression became so common among us, that we added it to the names of the distinguished cavaliers to express the worth of their character, as, for instance, we used to say, Señor Don Juan of so much tepuzque.”

Footnote 7:

Those who wish to be more extensively instructed in the Mexican system of numeration can read: _Leon y Gama_, Descripcion Hist. y Cronol. de las dos Piedras, Parte II., Appendice II., page 128, Edit. C. M. de Bustamante, Mexico, 1832. _Clavigero_, Storia antica di Messico, English translation by Ch. Cullen, London, 1807, Vol. I., Book 4, pag. 410; and an article recently published by _Orozco y Berra_, in Tom. I., Entrega 6ma of the Anales del Museo Nacional de Mexico, 1879, page 258, which article is the most complete hitherto written on the subject, and is illustrated by 53 cuts.

Footnote 8:

There is, indeed, one passage in _Herrera (Antonio de)_, Hist. Gen. de los hechos de los Castellanos, Madrid, 1729, in his introductory Descripcion de las Indias, §§ Zacatula and Colima, where the working of copper mines by the indigenous people of these provinces is mentioned: “There are very abundant copper mines in this district, more towards the East, and near the port of Santiago. The Indians make _marvelous vessels_ (_vasos_) of this copper, because it is sweet (_dulce_). They have, however, still another kind of copper, which is hard, and which they employed for tilling the ground, instead of using iron, for they were not acquainted with iron before the Spaniards entered the kingdom.” As will be seen later, there is no doubt as to the latter assertion. But we fear the former to be an anachronism and the manufacturing of _vasos de cobre_ (copper vessels) will have to be assigned to the epoch after the Conquest, when the art of hammering was introduced and eagerly accepted and practised by the natives.

Footnote 9:

Carta de Hernan Cortes al Emperador, de la gran ciudad de Tenochtitlan, desta Nueva España, a 13 dias del mes de Octubre de 1524. Edicion _Gayangos_ (Don Pascual de), Paris, 1866.

Footnote 10:

Tachco, to-day Tasco, at a distance of 25 miles, S. S. W. from the Capital. A. v. Humboldt visited the memorable spot. See Essay s. l. Nouv. Espagne, Livre IV., Chap. xi.: “At the west of Tehuilotepec, is the Cerro de la Campañia, where Cortes began his work of investigation.”

Footnote 11:

The words of the text are: “Ciertas pieçeçuelas dello, a manera de moneda muy delgada, y procediendo por mio pezoquiza, halle que en la dicha provincia y aun en otras, se trataba por moneda.”

Footnote 12:

In Molina’s vocabulary a suggestion can be found for what technical purposes _tin_ might have been employed. The word _teputzlacopintli_ is translated with cañuto de estaño, para horadar piedras preciosas (cylinder of tin for perforating precious stones). We may, therefore, presume that the holes bored through the well known green jade trinkets, were drilled by the aid of the mentioned cañuto de estaño.

Footnote 13:

This little figure symbolizing gold, recurs only once more in all those Mexican paintings which we have been able to examine. It stands in Vol. I., Kingsb. Collection, Cod. Mendoza, page 13, fig. 4, and is identical with that represented by the engraving. We do not venture too far in asserting that the symbol on this gold piece represents a genuine Mexican numeral. It is composed of a cross, having a dot in each of its quadrants. This cross is the well known symbol of the number 8000 (_xiquipilli_), and each dot stands for the number 1. We have thus expressed four times 8000 (nahui xiquipilli) or 32,000. Here, however, the interpretation ends, so far as it may be based upon accepted authorities. Whatever else there is to be learned concerning this number 32,000, found on the gold piece, must be derived by the confessedly hazardous process of induction.

Nevertheless, let us try this process and ascertain what the number 32,000 actually refers to. In answering this question it may, perhaps, fairly be assumed that the number stands in a direct relation to a certain numerical unity, like that in which hundreds stand to the tens, 100:1. Such a numerical unity, however, presupposes the existence of some tangible equivalent, which in Mexican commerce, if it was not some small piece of metal, would have had some other conventional representation, either in merchandise or in labor. If such a unity actually existed it is clear that its value must have been fixed either by weight or by measure. There is, however, no positive proof that such a unity, fixed by weight or measure, ever existed among the Mexicans. Cortes, in the above quoted letter, pretends that it was impossible for him to detect the use of any weights or scales, and no writer after him has touched this question or given any other decision. Respecting measures, there is no direct testimony at all. But, on the other hand, it is hardly to be imagined that these people, of whose religious administration and social polity we have such abundant evidences, should have been deficient to such an extent in the department of their commercial polity as not to have found any method by which the proportion between the value of the precious metal to merchandise in all its forms was to be expressed. We must guard ourselves against the fallacy that because we are not acquainted with the method it could not have existed. There are grounds to believe that Cortes was right in saying that the Mexicans did not know the use of weights (their vocabulary does not show any word answering to peso, pesilla, libra, balanza romana), but, we think they knew perfectly the use of measures (the vocabulary gives about twenty words for all varieties of this operation); and in regard to a certain unity of measure employed in gold transactions, there are indications given by other trustworthy writers that this unity might be detected in the quills, of conventional length, and probably of conventional diameter, which quills were filled up with grains of gold dust, by the color and shades of which they graduated the respective value. Bernal Diaz, Chapter 92: Antes de salir de la misma plaza, estaban otros muchos mercaderes, que, segun dixeron, era que tenian a _vender oro en granos_ como lo sacan de las minas, metido el oro en unos _canutillos_ delgados de los anserones de tierra (thin goose quills) e asi blancos porque se pareciese el oro por defuera, y por el _largor y gordor_ de los canutillos (length and width of the quills) tenian entre ellos su cuenta (they made up their account) que tantas mantas o que xiquipiles de cacao salia o qualquier otra cosa a que lo trocavan.

This point being settled let us next introduce one other, for it will contribute to strengthen the probability that besides the quill there existed still a lower unity, that of the grain of gold itself, by which they counted. For this purpose, let us turn again to the gold piece represented in the painting. It is round. This reminds us of what was told by Cortes of the little pieces of _tin_ discovered in Tachco, which, he said, were used as coins. Likewise, we read in Bernal Diaz that Motezuma used to pay with pieces of gold when he lost in playing _patol_ (trictrac) with his Spanish jailors. The word employed by the author and eye-witness of the game, is “_tejuelo_,” which, according to Spanish usages and the dictionaries of their language, signifies: a round piece of metal. The author moreover informs us of the value of this tejuelo. It was 50 ducats of weight and must, therefore, have been equivalent to, at least, one hundred dollars of gold. Since Bernal Diaz in this entire passage wishes to express his highest esteem for Motezuma on account of the princely generosity with which he paid even those whom he knew had cheated him, we may fairly conclude that these tejuelos were not the lowest, but rather the highest, gold pieces that he had at his disposal. Should we now remember the number, 32,000, which is the highest found represented in Mexican pictures (they generally never exceed that of 8000, the _xiquipilli_), it is not at all improbable that the Motezuma-tejuelo, about 100 dollars worth, might have been equivalent to 32,000 unities, while this unity may have been one grain of gold. For if we would divide 100 dollars of gold into 32,000 equal parts, or still farther divide one gold dollar into 320 equal parts, each part would represent a very small portion of gold, but still large enough to be counted separately with the finger. This was the way the gold-dust was collected on the placeres, not by men but by women and children. The procedure was primitive, indeed, in the highest degree. In such a way, however, gold gathering was undoubtedly practised in the first stage of men’s civilization. If not written in history, yet the linguistical testimony bears witness to it. We find the expression “_grain of gold_” to be the common property among the ancient and modern nations in connection with commerce and the weighing of gold.

Footnote 14: